March 23, 2026 · CONSUMER PROTECTION, TECHNOLOGY AND UTILITIES · 2,243 words · 8 speakers · 29 segments
Thank you. Thank you. Representative Benham. Designation. Representative Borowski. Representative Cephas. Designation. Representative Gallagher. Representative Haddock. Designation. Oh, pardon me. Representative Hohenstein. Representative Isaacson. Yes. Representative Maligari. Representative Mullins. Designation. Representative Monroe. Representative Nelson. Representative Pielli. Representative Steele. Chairman Metzgar. Here Representative Hogan Representative Kale My understanding is he online Representative Kaufman. Designation. Representative Kutz. Representative Major. Representative Mahaffey. Representative Mihalik. Designation. Representative Renkavage. Designation. Representative Tomlinson. Designation. Representative Warner. Designation. Representative Williams. Quarren being present, we're going to consider House Bill 1964, Public Water Protection Act.
Yes. House Bill 1964 establishes a 12-month moratorium on the privatization of public and wastewater systems and repeals the fair market valuation rules of Act 12 of 2016.
Chairman Metzger, comments?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate that we've offered this bill. You know, I think no one wants rates to increase, and I understand that that's the target of this bill. And I'm concerned about rates, too, but we should also be concerned about unsafe water, failing systems, and the hidden costs of doing nothing. The goal isn't zero increases. The goal is actually to be responsible and have sustainable systems over time. And in this case, you know, when you have a small town and that town goes alone, a single major repair can crush the residents. Larger systems can spread that cost across thousands of customers. And to take away a tool that these municipalities that are in distress can use is simply not something that we should be doing at this time. I think we need to have all the tools on the table so that we can have that safe, reliable water supply. It says nothing about the good operators that are out there that can continue to operate. They're not forced to sell in any form or fashion. And I respect that these are local government officials and that they should have the autonomy to make the decisions that they need to, whether that's to keep the system or to actually move the system along into a way that they can spread that cost over a number of different customers and a broader base. So with that being said, I urge a no vote on this bill. Thank you.
Thank you, Chairman. Representative Cahill. Representative Hogan.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I agree largely with what Chairman Metzger said, but I just want to point out, too, in the couple of months we've been debating this while we were back at home, state building trades, the state FOP, local government officials, I think this morning, have all sent letters asking us to put more work in this issue. We've had the time to do it. I think we still have the time to do it, so I think we should basically be tabling this issue until we can work it through with those partners that have been very thoughtful in their comments about this issue. Thank you.
Thank you, Representative. Representative Kayle.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sorry about that. I did not have my audio set up correctly, I don't believe. Mr. Chairman, thank you for recognizing me. I apologize for not being there in person, but I did want to make sure I made a couple of comments. I can only represent what I am hearing in my district and what's happening here in the 15th Legislative District. Our water authorities here, a lot of them are struggling. They have infrastructure needs. They're struggling to keep up with the demands of EPA standards. and selling their authority is really, for a lot of them, the only way that they can keep up with those demands and it's the only option that they have. I'm not sure what we are accomplishing by taking choices away from these local authorities. I think that giving them the option to sell and to do so is beneficial for our local communities. and for our consumers. So for those reasons, I'm a no on this bill, and I don't think it should pass forward through this committee. Thank you.
Representative Isaacson.
Good morning, and thank you. And I don't necessarily feel that we're debating whether we're going to recreate or try and recreate whether there's public or private water systems. I think that that is out there. But I think that there are so many problems that are going on. I believe that water, access to fresh water is a right. And we as the Commonwealth need to make sure that it is accessible and not getting outside of being accessible with regard to the rates that are being paid You know, certainly, you know, municipalities, et cetera, have bonding power and they can deal with that. But I think more importantly, we need to take a step back and evaluate what's going on with our utilities and access to them. And I think the portion of this bill that creates the working reform group within 60 days of the bill's enactment, including with the governor involved, certainly is giving us the time to take a step back and make sure that whether it's a public or private utility system, that they are making sure that everything is accessible to everybody while meeting needs that either the municipality or the city. the company has with regard to sustaining the infrastructure so that it's there for everybody. So because of that, I will be a yes vote, making sure that we have this working group and we can address these concerns during this moratorium.
Representative Williams.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think it's important to say out loud what the genesis of this bill really is, and it's about the Chester Water Authority on the whole. with the city of Chester trying to assert its ownership over a water utility that's actually owned by the city, Delaware County, and Chester County, and not just the city alone. The Chester Water Authority just won a case before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in which the Supreme Court confirmed that the two counties also own that authority. This bill is trying to hit a very small nail with a 50,000-pound hydraulic press by way of a statewide referendum, if you will, on how we're going to handle municipal authorities. The Chester Water Authority does not belong to the city of Chester. The Chester Water Authority is operating in an award-winning caliber. It does not need to be taken through a bankruptcy process to be put onto the marketplace. I want to be very clear that I've been fighting for the Chester Water Authority. This is not the right device to do it, but I am going to vote yes on it because I know at the end of the day this is really about CWA.
Representative Borowski.
Thank you, Chair. I appreciate the opportunity. Can we just clarify a couple things? I feel like I've heard some things here that I was not aware this bill did. So this does not prevent the sale of any distress systems or anything that is, you know, any systems that would need improvements or upgrades in order to maintain public health and safety. Is that correct during the moratorium?
Yes.
Okay. So that could still happen. So any distress system could still be sold. Any system that's already in the process, that would still continue to happen, correct?
Correct.
Okay. Great. Thank you. So really all this is is to take a step back. And we know that the sale of these systems is definitely, in many cases, while there are a lot of positives, and I credit the water systems that do come in and make a lot of upgrades. I live in a township where we have terracotta pipes where we spend a lot of money processing stormwater because of the water that's leaching into the pipes. It is not sewer or wastewater. It is stormwater. And we know that that is a big problem, and people are paying for that. So, you know, when the water companies come in and they do infrastructure upgrades, I think that is important, and, you know, we appreciate that. But what we do need to really look at is how that's ending up impacting the rest of the ratepayers. I had a – I really want to – I would like to thank Aqua. Aqua came in, met with me last week. We had a very good conversation about this legislation. I understand they're not in favor of it. But we had a really good conversation to talk about what we can do to address these issues because we can't be pricing people out of their homes because they can't pay their utilities. We need to look at this, and it needs to be a collective effort. So I will be supporting this legislation because I think that we need to take a step back, look at what we have going on, what was put in place, and certainly far predates me. being in the legislature and probably most of us, why that isn't working anymore, why that is ending up hurting people. I don't think anyone wants to hurt ratepayers. I don't think anyone wants to hurt anyone in the community. I think it's valuable to take a step back, look at what we've got existing, and see if there's something we can do better, and work collaboratively with the water systems to see what we can do to do things better to help everyone so I will be a yes vote thank you chairman thank you rep is Brooks
call the roll chairman Burgles yes representative Benham yes representative Borowski representative Cephas yes representative Gallagher representative Haddock Representative Hohenstein. Representative Isaacson. Representative Malagari. Representative Mullins. Yes. Representative Monroe. Yes. Representative Nelson. Yes. Representative Pieli. Yes. Representative Steele. Yes. Chairman Metzgar. No. Representative Hogan. Representative Kale. Kale. Representative Kaufman? Representative Kale spoke online. He was a no. Right. Representative Kaufman? No Representative Kutz Representative Major Representative Mahaffey Representative Mihalik. No. Representative Renkavage. No. Representative Tomlinson. No. Representative Warner. No. Representative Williams. We have a total of 15 yays and 11 nays. House Bill 2131 will be holding. We'll be voting on it at a later date. Next on our agenda is Resolution 403.
Absolutely, Chairman. House Resolution 403 designates April 2026 as PA Safe Digging Month in support of Pennsylvania One Call.
Chairman Metzger.
We're good.
Do we hear any negative votes on the resolution? Hearing none, the resolution passes. Now we go to House Bill 2333, Responsibility Utility Customer Protection. Tim, explain.
Absolutely. Chairman, this bill is a comprehensive update to Chapter 14, the section that deals with customer assistance programs that seeks to balance the needs of utilities to collect payments with the rights of consumers to be able to get back on track when they get behind on their utility bills. It sets clear rules for security deposits, expands payment arrangements based on poverty levels, and maintains critical winter shutoff protections.
Chairman Metzger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Of course, Chapter 14 and the reauthorization is the mechanism that allows utilities to collect from unpaid, unpaying, and unpaid customers. That's crucial for paying customers. And in today's rising rate environment, it's even more so. And so what this bill, and by its own declaration, it admits that unpaid bills threaten those paying customers, but it expands the ways that customers can avoid that timely payment, thereby increasing the cost to the paying customers who are covering the costs of others who can't or won't pay. For history, the Senate has passed a less generous version of this in the past, and I think that the legislative process requires compromise and that the Senate is willing to come our direction and has shown that by passing a bill that does give those unpaying customers more tools to become current. But this bill simply goes far beyond what the Senate is ever going to do. And so it's my hope that we're simply moving this out of committee so that we can make that compromise with the Senate and get something done that actually helps everyone, including and especially those who are paying customers and carrying the load here. But it's my understanding that there is no compromise at this point, and so that's why I'd urge a no vote on this, that this bill simply goes too far in favor of those who aren't paying their bill and against those who are.
Thank you. Ms. Brooks, take the role. Herman Burgos. Yes. Representative Benham. Yes. Representative Borowski. Representative Cephas. Yes. Representative Gallagher. Representative Haddock. Representative Hohenstein. Representative Isaacson. Representative Maligari. Representative Mullins? Yes. Representative Monroe? Yes. Representative Nelson? Yes. Representative P.L.E.? Yes. Representative Steele? Yes. Chairman Metzgar? No. Representative Hogan? Representative Kale? No. Representative Kaufman? No. Representative Kutz? Representative Major Representative Mahaffey Representative Mihalik No Representative Renkavich No Representative Tomlinson Yes Representative Warner No Representative Williams We have 16 yeas, 10 nays majority voting in the affirmative, the bill passes.
As we continue to protect Main Street and not Wall Street, I welcome conversations from our committee members so that we can find a common solution, particularly when it comes to water in our great state. We continue to tax and fee out people out of their homes. That's unacceptable. We need to find common ground solutions that will benefit Pennsylvanians, not Wall Street. Call this meeting adjourned.
Thank you.